Section 22 protection under sick company law does not apply when no revival scheme is pending and winding up is recommended.

Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 did not bar enforcement of the writ direction where the company had already been declared sick, the Board had recommended winding up, and no revival scheme was pending. The statutory suspension of proceedings was linked to a live inquiry, scheme, or related consideration before the Board, but the earlier direction to consider revival had lost force because no scheme was filed within time and no revival proceeding remained pending. On those facts, the protective umbrella of Section 22 was inapplicable and the challenge to the writ order failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 barred enforcement of the writ direction against a company already declared sick, where the Board had recommended winding up and no revival scheme was pending.

Analysis: The company had been declared sick under the statute, and the Board had concluded that its net worth could not be made positive, leading to a recommendation for winding up. The earlier direction to consider a revival scheme had lost significance because no scheme was filed within the stipulated time and no revival proceeding remained pending before the Board. In these circumstances, the protective umbrella of Section 22 was held inapplicable, since the statutory purpose of suspension of proceedings is tied to a live inquiry, scheme, or related consideration before the Board.

Conclusion: Section 22 did not apply, and the challenge to the writ order failed.

---